Dwight Anderson

It was a bad decision by Dwight Anderson, to say the least. I will assume he didn't INTEND to injure Stoddard, because I don't know.

As to bomberfan:

Here's the deal -- you're biased in that the infraction took place against your team. I'm sure all these Ti-Cat fans would feel the same way if it was theirs. Perhaps they don't realize the severity of the hit or what it could have done to Jamie (namely it could have killed/crippled him).

A lot of the fans around me were cheering, not because of the injury to Stoddard, but because they didn't feel it was warranted to throw out Anderson.

The two of which are completely different reasons.

As for the whistle, that's a matter of opinion and perspective, now isn't it? So why argue that? Why not just argue that the suplex should NEVER be used in football?

That would be a more valid point of debate in my opinion.

I was at the game and heard the whistle after the tackle. Stoddard was still fighting to break free ( from what I saw). BS call to throw Anderson out.

Again, not the point. The point is if they don't stop that kind of tackle players are going to get seriously injured which is bad for the league.

Edit: this is why I think it was right to throw out Anderson -- to set a precedent against that kind of hit.

One on one. Offence player fighting for yards. Defence player trying to tackle. Defence finishing the tackle. Yes could have been a serious injury resulting but being tackled is part of the game and so is trying to break free of the tackle before it is finished.

i maybe biased, but if that happened on your team and say it happened to Jason Mass, I wouldn't argee with it. The way I see it, I'd rather have all your startes vs the Bomber staters to see who really is better. The better team won this night, and for the series its currently tied at 1-1. I look forward to the next game in Hamilton when the Bombers come to play. Who knows what records we'll have by then, it will be one hell of a game.

I think the issue is one of tackling, not suplexing. Two different beasts, even in this UFC-myopic age.

Again, we are talking about taking a 200-pound man and suplexing him into rubberized concrete (aka AstroPlay in IWS's case). The subtlety in somehow homogenizing the two genres will still escape me after someone's neck is broken.

Oski Wee Wee,

Football is a game that includes intimidation as an integral part of the psycology. When a tackler throws a receiver to the ground or makes a hard hit that receiver thinks twice and looks around and maybe misses the next catch or 2. we have seen this time and again.

Absolutely correct. It should be explicitly stated in the league rules that suplexing -- or slamming players in an act beyond that of a spontaneous football move that does not entail lifting or throwing of an opponent -- is grounds for ejection and possible suspension.

Oski Wee Wee,

I get that. Ben Zambiasi and Less Browne never resorted to German suplexing an opponent to get their "welcoming committee" message out, however.

Of all the atrocities Angelo Mosca was purported to have commited on the gridiron, I don't think suplexing ever made that list. He did his suplexing in the wrestling ring. :wink:

There is a legal dimension to this. Any egregious assault on a player in a contact sport that goes beyond the contact one expects in the conduct of the game can render one liable to prosecution. It's not too much of a stretch to see something eerily Bertuzzian about a football suplex in the future crippling or killing someone in a clearly premeditated act on the field of play.

I am not stating that what Dwight did was premeditated. I think it WAS reckless.

In the "No Fun League" today, that kind of stuff gets a suspension. The CFL must have a zero-tolerance perspective on this matter.

Oski Wee Wee,

Correct Pseudo!
It has to be stopped ,it was the way Anderson picked him up and threw him back on his head and sholders (is that waht suplexing is?),it looked dangerous on the replay.
It was ruled an attempt to injure ,therefor the ejection and 25! yards!!

The play where Anderson knocked the pass down off Brazell was a game saver and a smart athletic play!

agreed oski...the play was dangerous because he was almost thrown on his head and could have easily been seriously injured...he could have made the tackle to the ground without suplexing him over his head...BUT this should not have been an ejection, 15 yarder max, same thing happened to Roberts a couple of weeks ago and there was no ejection...so why do they change their minds about this now? To me it seems like the refs have no balance in their calls and I think that something should be done, a fine against anderson will most likely come now but it shouldn't be a lot because he already missed out on half the game he should have still been playing in!
This quote is right on. It wasn't a smart play, but should have been a 15 yard penalty not a 25-yarder and an ejection. George Black will justify it - what doesn't he justify for the refs (another long thread sometime) :)

Hebert should have gotten the same treatment for his 5-second-after-the-whistle shove of Cheron with 3 mins to go. He got a 15-yard penalty. Inconsistency by the refs in the CFL stays a big concern and these two calls are just more proof.

By the way, is it just me, or watching games is Hebert one of the dirtiest players in the league?

I was wondering at the time if Anderson said something to the referees that caused them to eject him. Seemed like a very harsh penalty even though I share Oski Oui Oui's concerns about injuries.

Whatever your opinion of the tackle and the call, I still like the fact that Anderson didn't mope off the field shaking his head and throwing a hissy fit - instead he took it as an opportunity to work up the fans and show how much spirit he's got. That's the kind of player I want on my Ti-Cats team.

And a shout out to the fans behind the replay booth!

This is the Tiger-Cats, team of Angelo Mosca. You don't stop in the middle of a tackle unless you want to get hurt yourself. If it's too rough for the refs or the league, we take our punishment on this one and we win the game anyway. That's the way it used to be and it looks like maybe it's that way again. Woo Hoo!

I believe the problem lies in the inconsistency of the reffing as far as the ejection goes. As mentioned earlier, the same type of thing happened against Roberts in the Montreal game and there was no ejection. It's happened several times this year and nothing was done. Thus it was a little hard to accept the ejection. I am not going to argue about the late whistle, but I am going to say that I do not believe for one second that Anderson was trying to injure Stoddard. He is not that type of player. He was trying to finish the tackle and got carried away. A 15 yard penalty seems to be the norm in that situation so why he was given a 25 and an ejection is a mystery to me. I'm not a fan of these kinds of things where someone could be permanently injured, but the ejection definately wasn't deserved based on past reaction to the same tackle.

Perhaps the league needs to make a more clear definition of what punishment that type of tackle carries.

Without a whistle, (I only heard what I think was the whistle as they were going to the ground)I am not sure if it deserved ejection from the game. Not even sure if deserved a penalty, smaller man driving a bigger man backwards and into the ground! Sounds a lot like football to me.

Anyway, I think the Bombers lost the game right then and there. The Cats, sucked it up and took it to them. Think they just had enough of calls against them.

The whistle did not go until they were both in the air... poor decision by the officials.

I don't agree...it was a STUPID thing to do!

There was no need for that and it could have been a lot more costly if the game was closer or worse...had Stoddard been seriously hurt!

It was wrong and he deserved to be kicked out! I hope he learns from it!

If anyone uses that hit as a "bench mark" then we would never have got to see the greatest defensive player ever (Dick Butkus) finish a football game! He would have been tossed by half-time every game he played. He finished every tackle as viciously as he could and punished everyone, often his own players just to get at the ball. Like I said, on the field of play, no whistle it is just good hard football.

This is football, it's not touch football on the moon! If your gonna catch the ball and try to get the YAC yards the defence has to stop you by all means! Say Anderson turned sissy like a lot of people are saying he should be like and quit trying on the play. Then Stoddard goes and rips a big gain, you are all going to say Cut Anderson he doesn't bring intensity.

I think this team is finally going back to the Raiders of the CFL mentality of hardnosed football which will bring more wins to the team.